sundar-2

This is an awful adaptation, nay a distortion, of Agatha Christie's novel which I have read many times. Characters that are not in the book are found in this movie. Or minor characters have been given a more prominent role. As a nod to political correctness, the French dancer Mireille of the book is now Mireille, a black woman. The middle of this movie just drags on and is almost unwatchable though the pace picks up closer to the end. The famous Blue Train of France is shown as being hauled by a British locomotive, specifically a Class 5 4-6-0, which never was used in France! In an earlier installment of Poirot, a French train is hauled by a French locomotive, a Chapelon super-Pacific no less. Such a locomotive would have been used in 1930s France as the motive power on Le Train Bleu, at least part of the way from Calais to Nice. Therefore, the producers already had the footage that could have been used in The Mystery of the Blue Train. Both the script writer and the director are evidently incompetent.

I grew up reading The Phantom comics when they were being published in India during the 1970s. So, I loved this movie. Of course, I am biased. I love period piece films where the past is recreated. Movies can do that better than books can. The recreation of the 1930s in this film is wonderful. A lot of effort seems to have been expended on this. For this reason alone, this movie deserves a better rating on IMDB. Reviewers who call The Phantom an imitation of Batman have it backwards. The Phantom actually predates Batman by a few years. In an interview, Lee Falk, the creator of The Phantom, expressed his opinion that Batman was a copy of The Phantom.

Unlike most of the reviewers, I actually have read 'Hickory Dickory Dock' which Agatha Christie wrote in the 1950s and is set in post-war England. For some inexplicable reason, the producers moved the story to the 1930s. They also got rid of all the non-white characters from the book and needlessly brought in a left-wing British politician who is not there in the book.

I burst out laughing when Poirot asks Sally Finch, the American student, if she was in England on a Fulbright scholarship. The Fulbright program started in 1946 but this adaptation of Christie's tale is set in the 1930s! Anthony Horowitz, the writer, is responsible for this anachronism. Evidently, he knew nothing about American history.

As other reviewers have pointed out, the mouse gets too much screen-time and the poor attempts at humor involving Poirot's and Japp's cooking are not funny.

I love 'Poirot' and David Suchet, but this episode is simply awful.